Why MI5 Could Not Possibly Have Been Involved In Kincora – By MI5’s Hired Gun

The post below is reposted from Cathy Fox’s blog and deals with correspondence she conducted with the Secretary to the D Notice Committee in London in an effort to discover whether British spy agencies covered up pedophilia either by their own agents or targets they were interested in and justified this on the ground of national security.

The D Notice committee issues warning to the British media not to publish or broadcast news stories when the items might endanger ‘national security’. Unfortunately far too many media outlets in that country obey D Notices, accepting that a largely anonymous and unaccountable committee has the authority and moral right to decide what is in the interest of ‘national security’.

Clearly this line of inquiry has implications for MI5’s involvement in the Kincorapedophilescandal of the 1970’s and 1980’s , either because of suspicions that they recruited ‘visitors’ to the East Belfast Boys Home as agents to spy on Loyalist and Unionist groups or employees there and/or were themselves, as individuals, participants in the years of abuse of vulnerable young boys.

Recently these suspicions were strengthened when well-sourced allegations surfaced confirming suspicions that MI5 turned a Nelson’s eye to abuse at Kincora in the 1970’s.

The senior figure at the home, in fact its housefather, William McGrath, was a natural target for MI5. He was involved in the world of Loyalist paramilitarism, extreme political Loyalism and evangelical Protestantism. His group, Tara, a doomsday organisation with links to the post-Gusty Spence UVF, subscribed to the view that the Protestants of Northern Ireland were one of the lost tribes of Israel. All these associations made his activities at Kincora a potentially rich honey trap for MI5.

Cathy Fox’s correspondence shows that the official British attitude is that MI5 or MI6 involvment in, covering up of, or knowledge about pedophilia could not have happened because….well, because it could not have happened. So there you are!

I had wrongly assumed that Andrew Vallance would not reply to my last email. However to his credit he has. First I include part of my last email to him which is relevant to his reply. If you want to check out the whole correspondence the link is [1] and the full FOI Request [2]

Andrew Vallance

Cathy Fox to Andrew Vallance, (Secretary D Notice Committee)

“I shall acquiesce to your request to desist from further
correspondence, after this email. However I refute that 3 emails on
pertinent and legitimate points could be taken by any
reasonable person to be “repeated questioning that has become
burdensome and vexatious”.

My last question,
Reading the DA notice below, if an agent or officer of a secret
service mentioned in a) was a paedophile and abused children, is it
not entirely possible that there arises a conflict of interest in that if the…